The present invention relates generally to the field of retail and consumer merchandising, and more particularly to apparatus and methods for automated processing of retail and consumer merchandise in lockable containers.
The process of retail checkout is often a source of frustration for the consumer. Typically, retail checkout involves long wait times and interaction with inefficient or inexperienced retail clerks. In some instances, consumers must wait for several minutes to process a single item at checkout.
In addition, conventional checkout techniques are typically not integrated with inventory control or product activation. For example, security and audit tags, such as electronic article surveillance (“EAS”) tags, typically are manually removed or deactivated at checkout by the retail clerk using a separate process. This results in audit and security tags being unintentionally left behind on purchased merchandise. A security tag that is left on merchandise not only frustrates the consumer, who has to return to a retail clerk to have the tag removed or deactivated, but also decreases productivity and checkout efficiency.
There is a general trend toward self-checkout in retail stores, libraries, and rental locations, allowing consumers to buy or rent a product with nominal wait times. Self-checkout allows consumers to expedite their checkout process and partially or completely remove the interaction with the retail clerk. Some of the these self-checkout systems integrate payment with the self-checkout process, as with conventional grocery self-checkout terminals.
Such systems may also process merchandise protected with a benefit denial device. These systems provide a consumer with a physical asset at a point of sale (which, as used herein, will also include a “point of rental” or any other distribution or return point). The consumer then uses security information to obtain a benefit from the asset. A benefit denial device may deny a benefit to an unauthorized asset user and provide the benefit or permit access to the benefit to an authorized asset user.
The security information may be provided to the consumer at the point of sale. The security information may be stored with the asset in a form that is unusable by or inaccessible to the consumer until the consumer pays for the asset. The consumer is thus denied a benefit of the asset until the consumer has purchased or rented the asset. An entity that holds a right, such as an ownership right, in the asset is called a rights holder or content provider. The rights holder or content provider conveys a right to the consumer and is thus provided with protection against piracy and unauthorized reproduction of the benefit. This is because, in some instances, a pirate would be required to obtain the security information before acquiring the benefit. Furthermore, if a pirate were to sell unauthorized copies of the asset and provide buyers with security information, the rights holder or content provider could deny the benefit to buyers who use duplicated security information or security information corresponding to a stolen asset. This is often the case with software products that require product activation over the Internet or telephone with a unique product key.
An asset may include, for example, consumer electronics, cosmetics, an audio cassette, a CD, a CD-ROM, a video cassette, a DVD or a mini DVD, or any other asset capable of being stored in a storage case or container. The storage case may be displayed in an environment in which potential customers, renters, or users pick up and examine the storage case to determine whether they are interested in buying, renting, or otherwise acquiring the asset.
Known benefit denial systems for assets require security information to be stored on a card. The card must be “swiped” at the point of sale. Swiping a card is time-consuming and decreases the efficiency of point-of-sale processes such as check-out. The card is also exposed to viewing and tampering. Tampering may defeat the effectiveness of a benefit denial system.
In addition, the return of an asset in a container, particularly a rental asset in a container, poses several problems for the retailer. The retailer must manually process and restock the returned asset. Typically, this involves reactivating an EAS or other similar security device, locking the asset container, resetting the benefit denial device, and restocking the container on the sales or rental floor. This process can be time-consuming and tedious for the retailer.
In view of the foregoing, it would be desirable to provide improved apparatus and methods for processing and returning items at a point of sale quickly and efficiently.
It would be further desirable to provide apparatus and methods for preventing tampering with a device that retains security information.
It would be further desirable to provide apparatus and methods for verifying the security status of a container before the container leaves the retail or rental location.
It would be still further desirable to provide apparatus and methods for reducing risk of economic loss to an entity selling or renting an asset.